
|
Aspen Marketing --
Quid pro Quo |
|
|
Return to immediate prior article in sequence: Aspen Marketing -- Web Advertising or Aspen Marketing -- Web Advertising -- Documentation Return to Aspen Marketing -- Main Article (Navigation
note: To read the entire
article on Aspen Marketing, start by clicking
here, then follow
a red link each time you
encounter one. This will
take you through the entire article).
Quid pro quo marketing is
providing some incentive, often an item of value in exchange for
business.
It is not like the “cents off” coupon
from your neighborhood grocery store; it is more like paying someone who
appears to be a neutral source to tell you that is the best grocery
store in town.
We are not
accusing Aspen or
CRC Health Group of actual payoffs or
referral fees to educational consultants.
We will let you decide whether or not what we describe crosses
any troubling lines.
It
is hard to define where the proper boundary line lies that separates
good quality marketing from trading on conflict of interest and
quid pro quo.
Thomas J. Croke and Associates, Inc. was a marketing firm from
1990 to 1993, and our consultant was a marketing representative for a
for-profit programs for four years prior to that. We understand how this works.
Referral trades on personal relationships, so effective,
completely ethical marketers will try to build personal relationships
with those in a position to refer. In order to "get in the door" small favors are offered, such as taking a prospective referral source to lunch, running or sponsoring a conference and inviting potential referral sources, offering continuing education credits (CEUs), and hosting tours of their school or program with travel costs covered. Generally small favors to "get in the door" are considered ethical; large favors to pay for referrals are at best suspect. In some legal jurisdictions and in ethical principles of some professional organizations including IECA, favors that are compensation for referrals are unacceptable. (Since IECA addresses only the conduct of its consultant members, what is unacceptable to IECA is that a consultant would accept them; it is not the business of IECA to regulate programs)
We call
trading referrals for favors or payoffs,
"quid pro quo
marketing." Obviously, there is a very fine line between a favor offered
to gain access and to have the opportunity to explain a school or
program and/or begin to develop a personal relationship as compared to a
material incentive for referrals. There
is not unanimous agreement among responsible professionals as to where
that line should be drawn.
We tend to set a restrictive standard for ourselves and expect that
schools and programs we recommend will err on the side of avoiding
conflict of interest.
However, in the interest of full disclosure, we acknowledge that we have
been challenged by some who say our standards are not high enough.
With
that as background, we acknowledge that the procedures for which we
criticize Aspen marketing with respect to quid pro quo marketing might
or might not cross any objective standards for schools and programs.
We are not sure. We
want to be sure the reader knows that we are not accusing
These
are the areas of our concern that create a possible appearance of
quid pro quo marketing:
3a. Exorbitant perks (red link)
Navigating the Aspen Marketing article
Too
often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to
a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an
Aspen program. Clinicians and other referring professionals who
give that advice are likely falling victim to
.
. .
(more)
2. Web Advertising.
A
further example of where we would like to see improvement at Aspen/
CRC Health Group involves their
web advertising. We saw temporary
improvement about the time we previously called public attention to
this, but it appears the problem is back, or maybe it never left and we
just missed it. (more)
3. Quid
pro quo marketing.
Quid pro quo marketing is
providing some incentive, often an item of value in exchange for
business. It is not like the
“cents off” coupon from your neighborhood grocery store; it is more like
paying someone who appears to be a neutral source to tell you that is
the best grocery store in town. We are not
accusing Aspen or
CRC Health Group of actual payoffs or
referral fees to educational consultants.
We will let you decide whether or not what we describe crosses
any troubling lines.
(more)
3a. Exorbitant perks (red link)
Aspen, to its great credit, commissioned
an
extensive outcome study blanketing its schools, excluding its
wilderness programs. The problem arises when the study is used to
convince others of the effectiveness of one school or treatment center,
ignoring the fact that the results of many schools have been lumped
together. (more)
5. Referral
from one Aspen program to another.
When
a person is referred to an Aspen school or program, upon completion of
that stay Additional Links: Return to main article on Aspen Education Blog entry on closure of Mt. Bachelor Academy Official web site of Aspen Education Official web site of CRC Health Group Official web site of Bain Capital Return to Major Providers Index Return to Individual Schools and Programs Index Woodbury Reports links to Aspen Education Feedback is invited. We will publish selected feedback. Email FamilyLightResponse@yahoo.com Disclaimer: No program review, no matter how positive, is a blanket endorsement. No criticism is a blanket condemnation. When we express our level of confidence in a school or program, that is our subjective opinion with which others might reasonably disagree. When we assert something as fact, we have done our best to be accurate, but we cannot guarantee that all of our information is accurate and up to date. When we address compliance with our guidelines, you need to remember that these are only OUR guidelines -- not guidelines from an official source. We have also set the bar very high, and do not expect any school or program to be in total compliance. It is not appropriate to draw a conclusion of impropriety (or even failure to live up to conventional wisdom) from our lack of confidence in a school or program or from less than perfect conformity to our guidelines. Some will say we expect too much. Readers are responsible for verifying accuracy of information supplied here prior to acting upon it. We are not responsible for inaccuracies. Last revised April 12, 2010 |
||
|
|
||
| "Solutions, Not Just Referrals" | ||
|
For information regarding use of content of this website, click here |